Ex-Republican Says Hillary Clinton Is a Bush Enabler

Lincoln Chafee, the only Republican senator to vote against the Iraq war, doesn't think Hillary Clinton voted for authorization because she was innocently misled by President Bush. Instead, Clinton and other Democrats acted on political self-interest in 2002, as they did not want to appear "soft" on terrorism.

Chafee's bookAgainst the Tide: How a Compliant Congress Empowered a Reckless President, contains some harsh words for his former colleague, Senator Clinton:

Being wrong about sending Americans to kill and be killed, maim and be maimed, is not like making a punctuation mistake in a highway bill. They argue that the president duped them into war, but getting duped does not exactly recommend their leadership. Helping a rogue president start an unnecessary war should be a career-ending lapse of judgment, in my view.

Chafee may have been a victim of the war he voted against. Displeasure over the Iraq war is credited with the Democratic sweep of Congress in 2006. Chafee lost his re-election bid to a Democrat. Chafee, now a registered Independent, has endorsed Barack Obama. What do you make of Chafee's strong comments against Clinton? Would you like to see more votes on principle, rather than party line, such as Chafee's vote against the war in 2002?

And, if you would like to see some vintage video of Lincoln Chafee talking about the lonely moderate Republican lunch table with Jon Stewart,

Actually smp7328 I care. He's not just empty words he voted against something he thought was wrong, even when it went against his entire party. That takes guts. If people had voted to do what was 'right' thousands wouldn't have needlessly died. In my country our former Prime Minister lost his popularity and his position because of Iraq - everyone should be held accountable for their bad actions, no matter who they are, just as everyone should be praised for their good actions. So kudos to Chafee for doing what was right.

Listing Lincoln Chafee as "the only Republican" to vote against the war doesn't say a whole lot. Chafee was not much of a republican. And to give any credence to what he says now to only promote his book sales is a load of crap. I don't support Hilary Clinton but I definitely don't think she was an enabler to a "Reckless President." I love how comments like these only come out when someone is trying to push a book and now that Hilary is on the downslide in the election. He needs to sit back and shut his mouth now that he is out of congress. No one really cares what he thinks anyways. Shut the pie hole Chafee.

And, just for the record, I think the Clinton impeachment was ridiculous, as well. He lied under oath and that was wrong, I get it. But, seriously, what a waste of time and money. (And I'm a strong Republican, but I think the whole thing was ridiculous.)

Matdredalia, I agree that I don't think it should be a career-ending move. Yes, there was evidence that Iraq wasn't an immediate threat, but there was also evidence (and not just from the Bush administration) that it was. So, people on both sides of the aisle had to weigh the evidence and use their abilities to predict what would happen. Some people made an inaccurate prediction. But, a lot of them did what they thought was right at the time. As far as impeaching Bush, I think it would be difficult, if not impossible, to actually build up a case against him that would be strong enough to warrant impeachment. I also think it would be a huge waste of time, with more important issues at hand, it would be a waste of taxpayer money, and, even if the government started formal evidence gathering now, it would never be completed in 10 months.

Janneth - Even at the time the vote was being taken, Time magazine was pointing out time and time again that there still had been no sightings of WMDs. In the world at large, outside of Bush's rhetoric, there was plenty of evidence as to WHY we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. I was 15 years old in 10th grade and even I knew that something was amiss. Yes, it was a very scary time. I spent a lot of time after 9/11 waiting for the sky to fall. But even I knew better than to jump into a war without inclusive evidence.Our government acted irresponsibly and our country is paying the price.However, like I said, I don't think it should be a career ending decision.

Janneth - Even at the time the vote was being taken, Time magazine was pointing out time and time again that there still had been no sightings of WMDs. In the world at large, outside of Bush's rhetoric, there was plenty of evidence as to WHY we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. I was 15 years old in 10th grade and even I knew that something was amiss.
Yes, it was a very scary time. I spent a lot of time after 9/11 waiting for the sky to fall. But even I knew better than to jump into a war without inclusive evidence.
Our government acted irresponsibly and our country is paying the price.
However, like I said, I don't think it should be a career ending decision.

There were a number of sources out there that contradicted what the President and his people were telling Americans and Congress before the war. In 2002, former chief U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq Scott Ritter said that the "Iraqi threat" was a lie. Congress had heard from him before, members could have asked him more questions. Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh had a number of articles in the New Yorker that pretty much described what has since happened - so I'm very nervous that he does believe we're headed for war with Iran. Often, those articles would be mentioned on broadcast news reports. Congressmembers could have bought the magazine. The Huffington Post has been running a piece on another team of reporters who it says 'got it right'. Scary times are when we have to be most careful to critically question what we're being told.

But the prez lied and presented fabrications as facts. How could anyone know back then that Bush could do such a thing. I am a big anti-war person, but I do think it would have been irresponsible not to vote for the war--presented with these "facts". In light of 911. It was a very scary time, don't forget.

What do you make of Chafee's strong comments against Clinton? to me, it doesn't seem as though he is singling out Clinton, but simply pointing out that everyone who voted for the war at the time made a huge mistake. And frankly, he's right. They screwed up. Should it end their careers? Maybe. But then again, you don't see W's career ending over Iraq, do you? And he was pretty much the backbone of the Pro-Iraq movement and is the one who flat out lied to the American people and has continued to do so for five years, changing his reasoning for Iraq every time it suited him. Honestly, yes, our Senators screwed up, but if we should be spending the time damning anyone and trying to remove them from office, it should be Bush. In my opinion, 10 more months is too much. We need him out NOW.Would you like to see more votes on principle, rather than party line, such as Chafee's vote against the war in 2002? Absolutely. It would be not only a refreshing change, but also a glorious step in changing the direction that America's political scene has taken.

What do you make of Chafee's strong comments against Clinton? to me, it doesn't seem as though he is singling out Clinton, but simply pointing out that everyone who voted for the war at the time made a huge mistake. And frankly, he's right. They screwed up. Should it end their careers? Maybe. But then again, you don't see W's career ending over Iraq, do you? And he was pretty much the backbone of the Pro-Iraq movement and is the one who flat out lied to the American people and has continued to do so for five years, changing his reasoning for Iraq every time it suited him. Honestly, yes, our Senators screwed up, but if we should be spending the time damning anyone and trying to remove them from office, it should be Bush. In my opinion, 10 more months is too much. We need him out NOW.
Would you like to see more votes on principle, rather than party line, such as Chafee's vote against the war in 2002? Absolutely. It would be not only a refreshing change, but also a glorious step in changing the direction that America's political scene has taken.